The Cause of Obesity?

Discussion in 'Diet & Nutrition' started by anoop, Dec 29, 2011.

  1. anoop

    anoop New Member

    Here is a radio talk show by Tara Parker-Pope on NPR about her Fat Trap article ( basically the genetics of obesity). They also talk to Dr. Frank Arthur (founder and former director of the George Washington University Weight Management Program) about the genetics of obesity. I have linked the Fat Trap article in a post before in this thread.
  2. CDB

    CDB New Member

    And he is wrong, just as you are wrong. All the genetics in the world can't force me to go to the store and start horking down twinkies. No matter how screwed up my hormones are, my wasteline is the ultimate judge of my intake. You're starting to go toward Gary Taubes / borderline insane on this issue anoop, so this will be my last post. The ultimate reason anyone is obese is positive energy balance. Yes, that may end up screwing them for life by making it harder to maintain a lower body weight. Yes, their hormones may be sending them hunger signals when they really don't need food. Yes, their gut flora... etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. You can blather on about proximate causes and contributing factors all you want, the bottom line is that the physical laws of the universe which govern how every system works from our bodies up to and including black holes says it's energy balance. So unless you're going to make the ultimate argument against free will itself, it comes down to energy balance and self control. And I don't give a crap if people claim they're counting calories and still getting fat, because energy balance says if they are gaining weight then they have to be in a calorie surplus, so they're counting wrong, plain and simple. Energy balance is like gravity, it's not debatable unless you want to go into lunatic territory. And everything you keep bringing up is subsumed by energy balance; all it's telling us is why some people have a harder time than others.
  3. anoop

    anoop New Member

    Your emotionally charged comments repeatedly saying the same thing tell me one thing: And as you wrote you are overweight and you just can't admit that there is a genetic component that would make it harder for you to lose weight and maintain it. It just shatters your dreams. It is just an example of cognitive dissonance. It s just one of those talent vs hardwork debate.

    I think the conclusion of the fat trap article from an obese person's perspective is apt here:

    For me, understanding the science of weight loss has helped make sense of my own struggles to lose weight, as well as my mother’s endless cycle of dieting, weight gain and despair. I wish she were still here so I could persuade her to finally forgive herself for her dieting failures. While I do, ultimately, blame myself for allowing my weight to get out of control, it has been somewhat liberating to learn that there are factors other than my character at work when it comes to gaining and losing weight. And even though all the evidence suggests that it’s going to be very, very difficult for me to reduce my weight permanently, I’m surprisingly optimistic. I may not be ready to fight this battle this month or even this year. But at least I know what I’m up against.
  4. TangoDown

    TangoDown Member

    "And as you wrote you are overweight and you just can't admit that there is a genetic component that would make it harder for you to lose weight and maintain it."

    And that is where you fall. Arguing that the genetic component is a factor in obesity is fine. Arguing that the genetic component takes responsibility out of the equation is ludicrous. That is why we reject and rebuke the notion that one should be told "it's not really your fault, it's your genetics." Telling someone that working harder than their fellow man to achieve the same success is an unfortunate fact of existence. You play the game of life with the cards you are given. You adapt to challenge. A flower must change its position to receive the sun rays it needs. This is not semantics. This is adaptation. And if you start to clinically deconstruct my metaphor, I'm going to bash my head into my keyboard ;).

    So the "physiology" vs "hard work" argument is not nearly as emotionally charged and subjective as you make it out to be.

    Now, your ENTIRE argument is stating "most fat people are fat because they are prone to getting fat," and that does NOT in any way shape or form allow you to discredit the mental enigmas via specific events, etc, OR circumstance (****stain public school lunches, lack of economic access to food that is "calorically" conservative, etc) that cause one to consume the diet that he or she consumes.

    Hence, you're essentially pointing out an ant among an ant hill as a way of partially justifying non-disorder-based obesity. I don't need to pull out study upon study and statistic upon statistic to solidify the ABSOLUTE FACT that at the end of the day, IT IS PSYCHOLOGY and CIRCUMSTANCE that leads one to obesity. If one was to prove a drive to addiction existed more prevalently among certain individuals on a physiological level, THAT WOULD NOT EXCLUDE the CIRCUMSTANCE that brought one to the addiction (whether that be drugs, ****ty food, sex with prostitutes, etc), NOR would it EXCUSE an individual from accepting blame for placing the needle into their vein. Just to throw one out of left field, if I'm more inclined to crash my car because I have lower than average peripheral vision, THAT doesn't mean I should NOT accept full responsibility for rear-ending a family's minivan. This isn't semantics, nor is it ANECDOTAL. What it is, is LOGIC. Cold, hard, LOGIC. Take your head out of your obesity studies and UNDERSTAND that the genetic factor, though a contributor, is not PRIME for WHY a healthy individual goes from lean to obese.
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2012
  5. CDB

    CDB New Member

    Jut a quick correction: if you rread my posts then you'll see I have said numerous times that some people, myself included, will have a harder time losing and maintaining weight and that there are numerous reasons for this, genetics included. However those reasons are subsumed by energy balance and action, not the other way around. Now you are misquoting and mischaracterizing my posts which is intellectually dishonest, and if that's your standard of argument then your posts and articles are worth skipping because they're worthless.
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2012
  6. anoop

    anoop New Member

    I am not sure what you are saying. All that caps lock in your words doesn't make your point more right.

    And read my conclusion again if you think that I wrote that genetics argument is just a way to justify being fat.
  7. TangoDown

    TangoDown Member

    You're utterly full of yourself, holier than thou attitude is absolutely grating ; not to mention every post you make on these forums advertises your website.

    Go away.
  8. anoop

    anoop New Member

    Relax. Why are you getting so emotional? I maybe wrong and this is not my idea either. When you write using caps lock, it means you are shouting at top of your lungs. I hope you know that.

    And I have been writing on HST ever since HST started ( before you even heard about HST). I just started a new username since I couldn't login to the new forum with the old one.

    I only post some of my posts which has some research backing because I know HST is all about science and research. So I expect more people in here to appreciate it and have a meaningful discussion.

    And I have had that site for 3 years. I am not selling anything nor doing any consultations. Find me another site which does that.

    Now ask about the validity of the twin studies, question the claims of what I think an average person will gain in a toxic environment, question the studies which shows people who move to developed countries gain weight, question why everyone think people were skinnier back in 70's, why Pima indians in one area are obese and one who are across the border are lean. These are the questions that calls the genetic arguement into question. Just keeping on saying I am wrong, it is LOGIC, throwing out analogies is not how scientific discussions work.

    Thank anyway for the discussions.
  9. anoop

    anoop New Member

    Thanks everyone for all the discussions. I have PM'ed a couple of people so things might be a bit more cooler. It is better to close this thread I feel.
  10. Paul Brewer-Jensen

    Paul Brewer-Jensen New Member

Share This Page